You have four solid bench players, it's just that your team is so damn old. It doesn't mean bad, but KG isn't really very good anymore and Joe Johnson basically ******* blows. Paul Pierce is still good but he's really beat up.

KG's fine. His leadership and defense are what we need the most. If he hits his elbow jumpers, we're fine. It's Brook's team, simple as that. Johnson and Pierce are complimentary players and spot up shooters. It's Brook and D-Will. Nets were what, a 5 seed last year starting Evans and Wallace. People need to realize that and how much we've upgraded.

KG's fine. His leadership and defense are what we need the most. If he hits his elbow jumpers, we're fine. It's Brook's team, simple as that. Johnson and Pierce are complimentary players and spot up shooters. It's Brook and D-Will. Nets were what, a 5 seed last year starting Evans and Wallace. People need to realize that and how much we've upgraded.

I can't imagine Brook Lopez leading a team to the Finals. He's a good player, but he's not THAT type of player. This needs to be Deron's team for them to make a deep run. And I'm not even confident in that. Which lead's to my next point.

Pierce is not a complimentary spot-up shooter and never has been. He won't be this year. He'll either:

1) Be the top dog on offense like he has for the majority of his career.
2) Get injured.
3) Struggle in a role he's not comfortable with because DWill and Lopez (and to some extent JJ) need the ball. Or struggle because he's old and declining (it's going to happen at some point and his FG% has dropped the past two years).
4) Some combination of 2 and 3 (what I think will happen).

And Jason Terry sucks at this point.

I don't buy the Nets. Every single one of their big-name players has at least one question mark - durability, age, declining skill.

Yes, if they all stay healthy, it is a remarkably impressive collection of NBA
talent. And they'll have 82 games to mesh and perhaps become a good team. But I think the Bulls (if Rose) and Heat are miles better and would not be surprised to see the Nets be a huge disappointment, a la last year's Lakers (comparing post-trade, preseason buzz, not specifics in each situation).

You have four solid bench players, it's just that your team is so damn old. It doesn't mean bad, but KG isn't really very good anymore and Joe Johnson basically ******* blows. Paul Pierce is still good but he's really beat up.

The Knicks are not a top 5 team in the East, so...

Here's the thing.

The Knicks win total is 49.5 in Vegas.

You believe that even at full strength, the Knicks will win about 40 games. So let's say you're off by 5 or 6 games and they win 45 or 46. OR let's say a key guy or two get injured. Based on what you're saying there's pretty much no scenario in which they get close to that number.

So why not take the gift money? Vegas is way off, Knick fans are way off, the media or whatever it is you think that makes that number too high - take advantage of it!

I'm seriously suggesting you do this if you really feel the Knicks are going to be so bad. There's really no reason not to.

Nets didn't get better by grabbing 2 washed up veterans that are too old/fat to guard anyone.

Brandon Jacobs came back to the starting lineup before Derrick Rose did. Plus Thibs will run his team to the ground before the playoffs start.

Pacers still don't have a PG.

Soooooooo

#AStormIsComing

-George Hill is better than Felton...by a lot...and at everything
-You acquired the worst player in the game. I'd take an above average (Pierce) and average (KG) old bastards set over those two. They also acquired a well above average sixth man (AK-47).
-The Pacers didn't really get better (depends on which Granger shows up), but they're better than the Knicks still

And you know you're not deeper. Tim Hardaway is absolutely atrocious, Bargs blows, and you have like 2 bench players.

-George Hill is better than Felton...by a lot...and at everything
-You acquired the worst player in the game. I'd take an above average (Pierce) and average (KG) old bastards set over those two. They also acquired a well above average sixth man (AK-47).
-The Pacers didn't really get better (depends on which Granger shows up), but they're better than the Knicks still

And you know you're not deeper. Tim Hardaway is absolutely atrocious, Bargs blows, and you have like 2 bench players.

1. No he's not. George Hill is not a PG. He turns it over a lot more than Felton too.

2. Bargs is better than Amare's suit sitting on the bench. So he's an upgrade. Plus he's been playing well so far.

3. No they're not. Granger is going to screw up their chemistry on offense.

4. Tim Hardaway just hit the game winning shot in our last PS game. So eat it. Plus Shump, Martin, Bargs (if we go Melo at the 4) plus Artest makes a very solid group of players off the bench.

So yeah. We're good. If Shump takes the next step on offense this year we're going to be very good. We'll be a sick defense this year, if we can just get some offense out of Shumpert watch out.